Response to Questions
21 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Professional, Administrative and Management Support Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA8217-10-R-5022
About this file
Response to Questions (10 Dec 10)
Text of this file
Sheet1
| 10-Dec-10 | |||
| Document | Page Number | Question | Government Response |
| PWS, Para 2.1.2.2.9 | 17 | This identifies each SSR must meet the PWS requirements. It states that each SSR could have Low, Medium or High operations temp. The operations tempo found in the Pricing Table is an estimate of the normal requirement. The pricing sheet identifies the normal operations tempo for the ANG SSRs only. What is the normal operations temp for all the other SSRs listed in the pricing sheet? | The normal ops tempo for all other SSRs is to be determined based on the needs of the customer at the time the order is placed. From order to order the ops tempo at each location might change based on varying circumstances, therefore, the government cannot reasonably the "normal" ops tempo for each location each year. |
| DD Form 254, Attachment 8 | This mentions the Mission Planning Systems (MPS) Security Classification Guide (SSG) dated 3 Aug 2006. Since this is guidance to PMs, developers, testers, and operational users for software, hardware, and documentation, please provide so we can confirm we know what is required and implement appropriate procedures to meet requirements. | A copy of the Security Classification Guide will be provided to each bidder upon request but not posted to FBO. Please provide the request to the PCO via email. | |
| RFP, Section B | Can Surge (CLIN 0005) be applied to both CONUS and OCONUS? Will government accept separate costs for each. | The government expects to get one surge rate per labor category that can be applied to both CONUS & OCONUS. | |
| Section-J Pricing Table | There is a lot of confusion as to how to fill out the Pricing and Staffing Tables. Instructions for Completion on the Pricing Table state: "- Note: this spreadsheet is requesting the MONTHLY firm fixed price per location per calendar year” |
“- Fill in each cell, not grayed out, with the firm-fixed price per month for that combination of labor category and operations tempo” “- Grayed out boxes are intended to be left blank" Does the Government want the MONTHLY firm fixed price per SSR FTE per location per calendar year or does the Government want a total MONTHLY firm fixed price (all services) per location? For example, if our team believes there should be 2 SSRs at a facility, should the rate reflected on the spreadsheet be for each SSR or for the total proposed price of the two SSRs combined? Furthermore, how does the Government intend to determine if the proposed monthly firm fixed prices are reasonable? Specifically, the Pricing Table Instructions for SSR and MPSSF Worksheets state that the firm fixed price per month contained in each cell (of the applicable Pricing Tables) “shall include but is not limited to” the cost elements listed under the SSR and MPSSF Worksheet Instructions. In order to enable the Government to confirm that these (as well as other applicable) cost elements are captured and proposed in each cell of the SSR and MPSSF Worksheets, and not in the cost reimbursable CLINs 0003 and 0004, we recommend that the Government require a detailed buildup by cost element of the monthly SSR and MPSSF firm fixed prices.
| The government expects to see MONTHLY FFPs for the total (all services) per location. Per the example given, the government would expect to see the total proposed price of the 2 SSRs combined. Price reasonableness will be determined IAW Section M, Para 2.2.1.1. | ||
| PWS, Para 2.1.2.1.4.3 | In the PWS, section 2.1.2.1.4.3 Fielding, the Government states: "At the end of 2010, the following platforms will be fielded on the specified mission planning systems below: |
JMPS: F‐15 C/E, B‐1B, RC‐135, F‐16 Blk 40/50, A‐10, and F‐22A MPS‐UNIX: B‐2, U‐2 and B‐52 PFPS: All others By the end of 2011, the following additional platforms are scheduled to be fielded on JMPS: E‐3 and F‐16 Blk 30.
By the end of 2012, the following additional platforms are scheduled to be fielded on JMPS: E‐8 and RQ‐4.
The MPSSF is responsible for maintaining changes in the field to include hardware and software upgrades / modifications."
Can you verify that there are only going to be two fieldings in 2011 and 2012 and that these are the only fieldings that the contractor will be required to support?
| There are several more fieldings in 2012 than listed. The list represents platforms that will transition from a legacy MPS to JMPS. Please see the attached DT/OT/Fielding schedule. The dates in the schedule are subject to change. | ||||
| Pricing Table SSR tabs, and Instructions tab | Pricing Table SSR tabs, and Instructions tab | The instructions are: Fill in each cell, not grayed out, with the firm-fixed price per month for that combination of labor category and operations tempo | 1) See response above. 2) The task orders will be issued according to the ops tempo/labor category at the time the order is issued. Orders will be issued for a period of performance no longer than 12 months. |
| Question 1: Should the contractor require two or more labor categories to accomplish the work should the contractor provide a blended rate in the FFP? |
| Question 2: How would the Task Order’s be issued should a requirement change after award of the Basic contract (ie. Security level or ops tempo)? |
* request a full answer here as we are we seeking clarification from what is on the solicitation and previous Q&A
Pricing Table and Staffing table, all tabs Pricing Table and Staffing table, all tabs Question 1: Should the pricing table contain the total price for requirements per location by SSR Level? 1) Yes, each cell should show the total price for that location for all proposed FTE(s). 2) Yes, the staffing plan cells should just reflect the number of FTE(s) for that labor/ops tempo category. The government will expect that the proposed FTEs within a labor/ops tempo category all have the same clearances/IAT, not a mixture. For example, the government orders AF SSR T2-TS/SCI for a high ops tempo at Saginaw, MI and the contractor proposes 2 FTEs, Joe and John. We would expect that both be IAT Level 2 w/ TS/SCI. If Joe goes on vacation then John might be able to provide coverage while Joe is on vacation. 3) The intent of the staffing plan as part of the technical evaluation is to determine the reasonableness of the proposed strategy with respect to providing coverage at each location. 4) The Staffing Tables from each contractor will not be evaluated against other but rather evaluated for technical acceptability.
Question 2: Should the staffing plan contain the total FTEs to accomplish all requirements per location by SSR Level? Can the government provide an example of a what is expected in each non-grayed out cell of the staffing plan for fictional location for the case where the contractor would propose one IAT level 1 SSR with a Secret clearance and one IAT level 2 with a TS/SCI clearance? What should the staffing plan look like for this scenario at that fictional location?
| Question 3: If yes to question 2 please clarify the intent of the staffing plan as previous Q&A states that it is for technical evaluation. If for technical evaluation wouldn’t it make more sense to require the contractor to propose the SSR Level it would find appropriate to accomplish the work? |
| Question 3: How will the government evaluate the SSR tabs of the Staffing Table from one contractor to the other? |
* request a full answer here as we are we seeking clarification from what is on the solicitation and previous Q&A
| Government Furnished Property | Government Furnished Property Table | Question1: Will GFE be issued to the SSRs? | 1) Yes, the GFE list, although constantly update, provides the necessary equipment for the SSR to perform their function at their operating location. The government will provide a desk, chair, phone, CAC, and network access for each SSR working in a government provided facility. If there are proposals where SSRs, temporary or permanent, sitting in a contractor facility then the contractor will be expected to provide those items for the location(s). |
| Question2: If yes, what items would be issued? Will the list be revised to include these items? | |||
| Question 3: Per previous Q&A will the GFP list be updated to include the furnishings in the MPC facility that would be transferred to the new contractor? |
| Pg. 7 PWS | PWS/Para 2.1.2.1.1 and Staffing Table | The Staffing Table Excel spreadsheet for SSR staffing does not include all the platforms that are listed on page 7 of the PWS such as F-22, F-35, MC-12, KC-X. Is the contractor required to provide SSR support for these platforms and if so at what locations? | The contract does not provide SSR support for those platforms, with exception of the C-12. The government does expect to be able to work with the awardee on possibly providing coverage for the KC-X if a unit transitions from their current weapon system to the KC-X, therefore, replacing one workload with another. Although the specific need is not identified at this time, there may be a need within the life of this contract. |
| Pg. 7 PWS | PWS/Para 2.1.2.1.1 and Staffing Table | The Staffing Table Excel spreadsheet for SSR staffing includes the following platforms that are not on page 7 of the PWS. | The contractor is expected to provide SSR support for those platforms. Please note the systems outlined on page 7 of the PWS are weapon systems for which the contractor shall provide SME support. |
AMC: Elmendorf AFB, AK – C-12; Hickam AFB, HI - C37, C-40; Ramstein AB, GR – C-20, C-21; Scott AFB, IL – C-9, C-21; Yakota AB, JP – UH-1, C-12. AFRC: Tinker AFB, OK. ANG/A3: Baltimore ANGB, MD – C-27; Bradley ANG,CT – C-21; Charleston, WV- C-26; Hancock Field, NY MQ-9; Mansfield-Lahn AP, OH – C-27. AETC: Randolph AFB, TX-T1, T6. Unit Funded SSRs: Kabul, Afghanistan - Mi-17, C-27, AN-32. ANG/Predator: Ellington Field, TX- Predator, C-26; Fargo, ND – Predator, C-21; March ARB, CA- Tucson IAP, AZ- Syracuse, NY- Predator.
| Is the contractor required to provide SSR support for these platforms? | |||
| Pgs. 15-19, DD254 | Attachment 9 –Installation Listing of Locations Supported | All the locations that we are asked to give staffing numbers aren’t necessarily on the DD254 document - Portland IAP and New Orleans are examples. Is the DD254 listing notional or are these the only existing billets? | The DD254 listing is notional based upon existing billets and will need to be updated. |
| General | General | DISCUSSION: Living quarters in war zone locations | Living quarters in war zones are provided by the government where the SSR is expected to live "within the wire." |
QUESTION: Will living quarters be provided by the government at no cost to the contractor for contractor personnel located in war zone locations?
General General Discussion: SSRs by location. Answered above.
Question: What government provided facilities, services and equipment will be provided to SSRs located at each base in the staffing table? Desk? Chair? Telephone? Computer? CAC card and network access? Etc?
| Pg. 12, Attachment L-7 | Section L Attachments | The Past Performance Questionnaire Cover Letter Template states the questionnaires are due to the Government Contracting Officer no later than 22 Nov 10. Could you please provide the new due date? | Past Performance volumes are due on 20 Dec 2010. |
| Reference: Government’s response to Questions dated 24 November Line 21 | Please clarify what constitutes a customer. e.g., a MAJCOM, a specific location, a grouping of locations? | This varies. Our current customers consist of some MAJCOMs, some units within a MAJCOM, and the Army. The customers can be found in Pricing Table, SSR Tabs, cells A4, A71, A132, A241, A310, A332, A348, A358, A375, A378, A381, A384, A387, A390, A393, A442, A467, A504, A523. |
| Government’s response to Questions dated 24, Line 39 | Please clarify whether the Attachment L-8 Staffing Table, which doesn’t count against the page count, should be including in the Volume II Subfactor 1 Staffing Plan, or in the Volume IV Pricing Volume. | Clarified in the Amended Section L, page 3. The staffing table shall be included as part of Volume II, Technical. |
| Government’s response to Questions dated 24 November Line 52 | Please confirm that VOIP is GFE and provide service provider, make, and model and which communications service or provider is used. | The VOIP is GFE. The current provider is Nextiva with AT&T as the backbone provider. Services include basic phone, voice mail, 2 fax lines, 55 phone lines which include 1 toll free number, with call hunt group. |
| Government’s response to Questions dated 24 November Line 51 stated, “The workload estimates provided in the previously released Q&A are correct. They will be provided again as part of the final RFP documentation.” | When the workload estimates are made a part of the final RFP documentation, can the Government correlate these workload estimates to the Pricing Table rows, PWS items and the performance thresholds in PWS 2.2 and performance stated elsewhere in the PWS? | The workload estimates are estimates only and will not be correlated with the various areas of the PWS or other RFP documents. |
| RFP Section L.4.2.4.23 states, ““In addition, the offeror shall propose an approach to maintain and advance the existing classified Mission Planning System Support Facility (MPSSF) website.” | Is the MPSSF classified website the same as the MPC-S website? If so, will the Government provide information as to what functions this website performs now and what functions the Government sees it performing in the future? If not, will the Government provide additional details on the classified website functionality?” Are references to the MPSSF website referring to the MPC in all cases? | The functionality of the MPC-S website is very similar to the MPC unclassified website with tightened security. References to the MPSSF website are referring to MPC. |
| PWS 2.2 for MPC is specified at, “ 99.5% uptime and 100% compliance with all industry and government regulations/standards” | Offerors are required to price MPC maintenance and development on a fixed price basis and do not have a specification or engineering description adequate to determine what it will take to achieve the performance threshold. With this in mind, we respectfully request the following information: | a) With regards to the uptime requirement, it is the industry standard that only un planned outages within the Hosting company (i.e. maintenance contractor) would count against the uptime metric. Those items outside the contractors control, i.e. Act of God (plane crashes into building, satellite falls out of the sky, etc), upstream maintenance (AT&T backbone routing repairs, somebody cuts the power / backbone, etc) would not count against the uptime metric. Additionally, if it is a scheduled downtime (as approved by the MPC Technical PM) then that also does not count against the metric. b) The current contract does not have a requirement for 99.5% uptime but MPC does meet the uptime. c)The contractor shall comply with various government regulations, which are applicable at the time. d)The government will provide the winning offer access to all relevant MPC operation spaces and government-owned data/equipment during the 30-day transition period. |
| a. An engineering description of MPC sufficient to give the offerors an understanding of what design elements contribute to uptime and what constitutes “downtime.” | ||
| b. Government warrant that MPC will, at contract award, meet the uptime and industry/regulatory requirements that the winning contractor must support. | ||
| c. Government specification as to which industry and government regulations/standards the offerors must comply with? | ||
| d. Assurance that the Government will provide the winning offeror access to all relevant MPC operation spaces and data during the 30 day transition period so that the contractor can verify that MPC meets the uptime requirement at turnover? | ||
| Pricing Tables | There are currently no rows in SSR Pricing Sheets provided by the Government for B-2 SSRs at Whiteman AFB. Please advise. | The B-2 requirement was removed from this effort. |
Sheet2
Sheet3
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Response to Questions | — | |
| MPSSF Estimate of Hours.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Performance Work Statement | — | |
| Contract Data Requirements List | — | |
| Section L Attachments | — | |
| Pricing Table | — | |
| FA8217-10-R-5022 0002.pdf | ||
| FA8217-10-R-5022 0001.pdf | ||
| Response to Questions | — | |
| Response to Questions | — | |
| Contract Data Requirements List.pdf | ||
| Section L Attachments.docx | DOCX document | |
| Contract Security Classification Specification.pdf | ||
| FA8217-10-R-5022.pdf | ||
| Government Furnished Property.pdf | ||
| Performance Work Statement.pdf | ||
| Appendix C.pdf | ||
| Pricing Table.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Staffing Table.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
Show all 19
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .